Governing a country or leading an organisation requires having some socioeconomic and political ideological orientations. Social ideology helps in understanding people’s social dynamics, while economic ideology assists a leader in pointing out their economic interests and providing appropriate leadership mechanisms for them to thrive. However, political ideology usually informs the development and application of social and economic ideologies. Like the previous presidents, during his first inauguration, after noting that he had sworn on the Holy Book, President Muhammadu Buhari stated, “I belong to everybody and I belong to nobody. A few people have privately voiced fears that on coming back to office I shall go after them. These fears are groundless. There will be no paying off old scores. The past is prologue.”
Though checks reveal that this statement was a quote from the late Charles de Gaulle of France, it could be regarded as a political ideology of President Buhari despite the people’s view that he is not a career politician and/or a democrat. A series of analyses using critical discourse analysis, leveraging existing data regarding how late Charles de Gaulle exhibited the practicality of the ideology, indicates that it has negative and positive meanings, depending on the context in which it is used. It could be interpreted as a statement of inclusivity and unity, suggesting that the politician views themselves as representing all people, regardless of their differences. It could also be interpreted as a sign of detachment and isolation, indicating a lack of commitment to any particular group or ideology.
When President Buhari made the statement in 2015, different interpretations trailed it for days. To some people, President Buhari is open to hearing and considering the opinions of all people, regardless of their differences. He is also willing to work with a wide range of individuals and groups in order to find a solution to a particular problem. In this way, the statement is considered a sign of strength and solidarity and a statement of his commitment to the collective good.
Some people also had the notion that this statement is a sign of detachment and indifference, indicating that President Buhari does not feel any particular attachment or loyalty to any particular group or ideology and is not committed to any particular cause. Therefore, he is a human being and a Nigerian. And he is a part of everybody and everybody is a part of him. On different occasions, while making decisions on issues of national importance, President Buhari interpellated Nigerians with the statement. From policies that addressed social issues and needs to those that aimed at redressing the wrong political institutions, Nigerians struggled and are still struggling to understand the meaning of the statement.
Senator Bola Ahmed Tinubu is one of the seasoned politicians who interpreted the statement a few months ago while commenting on the outcome of the All Progressives Congress’ presidential primary election. According to him, “you (Buhari) belonged to everybody in the party and you belonged to none of the individual candidates of the party.” Before Senator Tinubu’s interpretation, President Buhari had earlier said “My problem is Nigeria and I have been involved in almost all the instability Nigeria experienced – the civil war, the coups and counter- coups. “That was why I said during my swearing- in that ‘I belong to everybody and I belong to nobody’.”
There is no doubt Nigerians have felt and are still feeling the use of the statement as a political ideology for managing socioeconomic issues and needs. Like the times of the Twitter ban, COVID-19 pandemic and ENDSARS protests, our analysis of digital data indicates that Nigerians are developing a significant interest in the number of days President Buhari has to rule the country. With the recent outcomes of his administration, which could be associated with the statement, our analyst notes that President Buhari really created an alternative identity for himself at the beginning of his administration and forced people to constantly create different discourses while creating their own identities.
